2. analog
  3. 1313770444

Who tweaks VTF too?

I can't say why it took many years for me to suddenly arrive at this point -- although I can identify the precipitating occurance as actually being mistake I made (as I suppose is often the case with many discoveries, large and small) -- but I've recently opened my ears to the practice of tweaking VTF for each record played, to very worthwhile effect. Generally within a range of up to about +.15 above the upper limit of the cartridge manufacturer's recommended setting of 1.35g-1.5g for my medium-compliance, line-contact MC cart -- i.e., up to 1.65g or anywhere in between, depending on the record being played, in about .025g increments.

Tracking a bit heavier accentuates the lower frequencies and tames the higher ones, for records that could use more weight or solidity and/or a reduction in gleam or glare or airy-fairyness, while tracking lighter does the opposite for records that sound overly thick or could use some opening-up (within the bounds of maintaining good groovewall contact, of course -- I never even run in the bottom half of the recommended range, much less below it). This minor revelation has helped significantly to increase my listening satisfaction with records I formerly would've just chalked-up as being slightly but irretrievably problematic, whether that problem might have been a subtly annoying touch of glassiness or peakiness or lightness in the loafers.

Each recording seems to have its own sweet spot balancing control, tonality, timbre and texture (within my system context), and after doing this individual fine-tuning procedure for a few weeks I've now started to intuit appropriate setting adjustments as needed, based on a record's initial sound and my growing experience with the outcomes. So I've definitely crossed over the proverbial Rubicon regarding tracking force and no longer regard the recommended range as inviolable, or VTF generally as a set-and-forget, one-size-fits-all proposition whose 'correct' value is predetermined, to be temporarily increased only in the event that dynamic-trackability difficulties are encountered. It's another thing to be tweaked! But also one of the easiest and quickest to do (at least with my tonearm -- I guess with some others maybe not so much). Anybody out there with me on this?
zaikesman

Showing 3 responses by dan_ed

dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
Wally would agree with you, Zaikesman. I have heard him say pretty much the same thing about how he believes it is VTF changes that we hear when we tweak VTA since the change in SRA is extremely small.

I don't adjust for each record, but if I detect something I will tweak VTA up or down. Most time this is less than one turn on the VTA adjustment. Is it that tiny change in SRA, or is it really that tiny change in VTF due to raising or lowering? I don't know. HOwever, it is far easier to change VTA on the fly than VTF on the fly. :-)
dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
There are a lot of us who hear what small VTF changes do. But as you say, it is only one parameter of several in a dynamic situation. I don't think making absolute statements as to whether it is this or that is helpful because these parameters must be taken in consideration together at all times. Maybe Wally would be interested in that debate. Yes, a few tenths of a gram can make a difference in some circumstances, IME, YMMV.
dan_ed
2,451 posts
 
Some of us have been doing this for a long time, and I know some who record this information for each LP. I thought you understood that. I keep o-rings to add to the arm stub of my Triplanar and my Talea has finite tracking force adjustment. However, it has not been my experience that focusing on only one parameter solves every situation.

Temp and relative humidity do play a role in how much gross VTF is needed.
More to discover